[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <902e41df-0c98-c8ef-09cb-a92cf053f9d2@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2023 05:08:13 +0200
From: Jan Karcher <jaka@...ux.ibm.com>
To: Wen Gu <guwen@...ux.alibaba.com>, kgraul@...ux.ibm.com,
wenjia@...ux.ibm.com, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com,
kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com
Cc: wintera@...ux.ibm.com, schnelle@...ux.ibm.com, gbayer@...ux.ibm.com,
pasic@...ux.ibm.com, alibuda@...ux.alibaba.com,
tonylu@...ux.alibaba.com, dust.li@...ux.alibaba.com,
linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v4 03/18] net/smc: extract v2 check helper from
SMC-D device registration
On 24/09/2023 17:16, Wen Gu wrote:
> This patch extracts v2-capable logic from the process of registering the
> ISM device as an SMC-D device, so that the registration process of other
> underlying devices can reuse it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wen Gu <guwen@...ux.alibaba.com>
> ---
> net/smc/smc_ism.c | 29 ++++++++++++++++++-----------
> net/smc/smc_ism.h | 1 +
> 2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/net/smc/smc_ism.c b/net/smc/smc_ism.c
> index 455ae0a..8f1ba74 100644
> --- a/net/smc/smc_ism.c
> +++ b/net/smc/smc_ism.c
> @@ -69,6 +69,22 @@ bool smc_ism_is_v2_capable(void)
> return smc_ism_v2_capable;
> }
>
> +/* must be called under smcd_dev_list.mutex lock */
> +void smc_ism_check_v2_capable(struct smcd_dev *smcd)
> +{
> + u8 *system_eid = NULL;
> +
> + if (smc_ism_v2_capable)
> + return;
> +
> + system_eid = smcd->ops->get_system_eid();
> + if (smcd->ops->supports_v2()) {
> + smc_ism_v2_capable = true;
> + memcpy(smc_ism_v2_system_eid, system_eid,
> + SMC_MAX_EID_LEN);
> + }
> +}
> +
> /* Set a connection using this DMBE. */
> void smc_ism_set_conn(struct smc_connection *conn)
> {
> @@ -423,16 +439,7 @@ static void smcd_register_dev(struct ism_dev *ism)
> smc_pnetid_by_table_smcd(smcd);
>
> mutex_lock(&smcd_dev_list.mutex);
> - if (list_empty(&smcd_dev_list.list)) {
> - u8 *system_eid = NULL;
> -
> - system_eid = smcd->ops->get_system_eid();
> - if (smcd->ops->supports_v2()) {
> - smc_ism_v2_capable = true;
> - memcpy(smc_ism_v2_system_eid, system_eid,
> - SMC_MAX_EID_LEN);
> - }
> - }
> + smc_ism_check_v2_capable(smcd);
The list_empty check is omitted here which means the
smc_ism_check_v2_capable does not touch the list.
So i think the call could be placed prior the mutex_lock.
> /* sort list: devices without pnetid before devices with pnetid */
> if (smcd->pnetid[0])
> list_add_tail(&smcd->list, &smcd_dev_list.list);
> @@ -535,10 +542,10 @@ int smc_ism_init(void)
> {
> int rc = 0;
>
> -#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ISM)
> smc_ism_v2_capable = false;
> memset(smc_ism_v2_system_eid, 0, SMC_MAX_EID_LEN);
>
> +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ISM)
> rc = ism_register_client(&smc_ism_client);
> #endif
> return rc;
> diff --git a/net/smc/smc_ism.h b/net/smc/smc_ism.h
> index 832b2f4..14d2e77 100644
> --- a/net/smc/smc_ism.h
> +++ b/net/smc/smc_ism.h
> @@ -42,6 +42,7 @@ int smc_ism_register_dmb(struct smc_link_group *lgr, int buf_size,
> void smc_ism_get_system_eid(u8 **eid);
> u16 smc_ism_get_chid(struct smcd_dev *dev);
> bool smc_ism_is_v2_capable(void);
> +void smc_ism_check_v2_capable(struct smcd_dev *dev);
> int smc_ism_init(void);
> void smc_ism_exit(void);
> int smcd_nl_get_device(struct sk_buff *skb, struct netlink_callback *cb);
Powered by blists - more mailing lists